According to one Wall Street analyst, Apple's soon-to-be-released iPad 2 could burst a bubble for competitors who are hoping to capitalize on the growing tablet market but remain unable to catch up.

Analyst Mark Moskowitz of J.P. Morgan Research warned investors early Wednesday that build plans for tablet shipments from Apple's rivals may be too high, presenting "increasing risk of a bubble burst" in the second half of 2011.

"In our view, the technical and form factor improvements of the iPad 2 stand to make it tougher for the first generation of competitive offerings to play catch-up, meaning actual shipments could fall well short of plan," Moskowitz wrote.

Using discounted build plan estimates to project tablet shipments for the year, the analyst claims that tablet makers will build approximately 65.1 million tablets in 2011. When compared against J.P. Morgan's estimates of 47.9 million tablets sold this year, companies could find themselves with as much as 51 percent oversupply in a worst case scenario.

Apple is expected to maintain the lion's share of the tablet market. Moskowitz estimates that Apple could see nearly 100 percent sales growth year over year, resulting in more than 29 million iPads sold worldwide in 2011.

According to Moskowitz, component suppliers could stand the most to lose from a bubble burst. "Based on our research inputs, tablet makers eager to emulate Apples meteoric start are trying to secure components with inflated build plans," Moskowitz noted. "Of note, glass displays, processors, and, to a lesser extent, NAND Flash are the components that could be most at risk."

Moskowitz has a "favorable view of Apple's products and operating model," but acknowledges that "Apple is not for everyone." However, holdouts hoping for an alternative to Apple's iPad may be "underwhelmed" by rival offerings.

"Aside from Motorolas Xoom and HPs TouchPad (which does not have a price tag yet), the competitive offerings appear to be light on attraction, in our view," said Moskowitz.

J.P. Morgan maintains an Overweight rating on Apple with a price target of $450.

Initial Wall Street response to the unveiling of the iPad 2 last week has been favorable. In general, analysts were impressed by what were seen as "evolutionary" upgrades to the device and the thinner and lighter form factor. At the time, Moskowitz admitted that his firm's forecast of Apple holding 68 percent market share in 2011 "may be conservative" in light of the iPad 2.

I think this is quite possible... the only way to compete with Apple's economies of scale is to buy big. However, if the product is as lackluster as the Xoom (great specs, poor experience) then they are likely to be left with a glut that they have to shift at discount bin prices (see 7" Galaxy Tab).

Consumers (in surveys) tend to rate Apple kit as worth about 20-25% more than the actual cost. Competing products are often the inverse. Thus a $500 iPad is perceived to be worth $600+ but a $500 GTab is likely to be seen as worth about $400.
That is a massive hurdle for OEMs. People are likely to choose iPad a very high proportion of the time unless OEMs price their stuff way below and thus make no $s on it.
It explains a lot of the iPod success where people typically will still not buy the cheaper competition even at a discount - hence 70% long term market share.

If people beat Apple at all it's on price. That is how the Android phones sneaked in, on lower priced handsets. But that won't happen with the iPad, for a while at least, since Apple are being very aggressive on price.

According to one Wall Street analyst, Apple's soon-to-be-released iPad 2 could burst a bubble for competitors who are hoping to capitalize on the growing tablet market but remain unable to catch up.

It's understandable. The competitors only had about 20 years to think about it. Just give them a little more time. It's good for them that the price of copy machines have gone down in price since then!

If people beat Apple at all it's on price. That is how the Android phones sneaked in, on lower priced handsets. But that won't happen with the iPad, for a while at least, since Apple are being very aggressive on price.

Not only on price (which is big) but also carrier push distribution - any carrier without the iPhone massively pushed Androids. It will be interesting to see the actual rebalancing in Verizon's smartphone portfolio at the end of the year with iP4 and iP5. More so if Apple release a true value competitor (though I doubt that will be a such a big deal in the subsidized US).

It's understandable. The competitors only had about 20 years to think about it. Just give them a little more time. It's good for them that the price of copy machines have gone down in price since then!

</sarcasm></rolleyes>

haha... good one. i'm glad you put the sarcasm word below, otherwise a new discussion would have start right here.

If people beat Apple at all it's on price. That is how the Android phones sneaked in, on lower priced handsets. But that won't happen with the iPad, for a while at least, since Apple are being very aggressive on price.

Here's the problem. Apple has spent billions securing key components which will make it extremely difficult for materials to be available for people to have volumes enough to subsidize their products to try and undercut Apple.

More importantly, it's being shown that Apple has hit the sweet spot in pricing and features.

I'm not sure what 100% means here but if iPad 2 lives up to expectations I could see them moving 5 million a month. Sounds like a lot but world wide it should be very possible. Unfortunately I think sales will be limited by production capacity for months.

Everyone, including myself, was caught off guard with how successful iPad 1 would be. Even with all the hype I think people are still under estimating how successful the iPad 2 will be. Apple might just own the entire portable computer market by the time iPad 3 rolls around. And this is coming from a Windows guy...

If people beat Apple at all it's on price. That is how the Android phones sneaked in, on lower priced handsets. But that won't happen with the iPad, for a while at least, since Apple are being very aggressive on price.

I like that Apple is being aggressive too, on price aside from doing as much in other areas, including technical side. Without much subsidy from telecommunications companies, it is possible that the iPod2 scenario might happen.

I am not sure exactly which is superior, the VHS or Beta recorder during the tape era??? Anyway, this is used as an example where supposedly the technically superior technology (VHS) was beaten by the Beta recorder untl the latter became univeral. I think the same upheaval is taking place in the competing "high definition" television technologies.

Unlike in the early 1970-1990s, there are more companies now worldwide with great technical resouces with sufficient financial resources to be able to take a few beatings, but live on to continue the fight.

There was a time when Japanese products were considered inferior (ca 1950s-1960s), but because of the interlocking of the financial-research and marketing system in Japan (through the Zaibatsus, they eventuallly eclipsed not only many of their American competitors but also their European competitors.

What my Japanese professor was explaining to me was that at some time in the past, there is "One Japan" - not only involving the government and the Zaibatzus but one that was tacitly supported by the Japanese nation. Part of this was the Japanese pride of a people with a long history, but utterly humiliated by their defeat in the Pacific War in the 1940s.

Then, I believe it was in the 1970s or thereabouts when products from Taiwan were considered technically inferior from Western and Japanese goods. Taiwanese are the same ethnic groups that were deposed during the Chiang Kai Tsec (spelling???) and Mao Tse Tung power struggle. Many fled to either Taiwan or Hongkong, some migrated to the Western Pacific rim. But, culturally they consider themselves "One People" too -- Chinese with very long shared history.

If you study the industrialization of Taiwan, and Mainland China, you will find that the practical Chinese power makers set aside politics and used the vast resources of mainland China to forward their goals, economically.

These cooperation and collaboration among Chinese, as "One People" is the reason why mainland China today is the second largest economic empire in the world. I do not think we would be alive to see it, but at the pace things are going in the United States (political gridlock coupled with extreme polarization). there is no "One America", I won't be surprised if China would displace the US as the number one economic power in the world within the second half of this century, if not sooner.

Don't discount the Koreans too.

The point here is that the competitors of Apple from these countries may not be doing as well now, but unlike Western companies, many Asian companies have the backing of their national industrialists and financial moguls, but also their people.

Let's not forget for example, that Apple is very dependent on Asian (China, Taiwan, Japan and Korea) techno-industrial empire. All it would take is a Chinese who has the vision akin to Steve Jobs, or some other builders of current multi-nationals. Unlike their parents, many Chinese of the elite classs have been educated or lived and traveled extensively in the Western countries. Even Steve Jobs have been influence by Asian culture in terms of his easthetics.

If the Motorola Xoom and HP TouchPad are Apple's best competitors then they have nothing to worry about. The Xoom was half-baked and the TouchPad is a carbon copy of the 1st generation iPad. When it arrives in the summer it'll be about a year too late. The Ars Technica review of the Xoom makes me think Android 3.0 was as rushed to the market as the Xoom itself. Maybe the really real competition arrives with the Android 3.1 tablets.

[...]. Apple has spent billions securing key components which will make it extremely difficult for materials to be available for people to have volumes enough to subsidize their products to try and undercut Apple. [...]

Back in 2005, Apple execs knew that the world was moving toward mobile devices using flash RAM. So they killed off the hard drive based iPod mini and replaced it with the flash RAM based iPod nano. Everyone was surprised that Apple had EOL-ed their most popular iPod model. For one with far less storage.

Now Apple is the largest consumer of flash RAM in the world, and they have virtually cornered the flash RAM market. They get the best prices and most of their competitors are forced to out-bid each other for the remaining supply.

And that's just one component. Apple is going to continue to work on lowering their component costs. And their volume purchases will give them the leverage to do it. This is exactly the opposite of the Android situation with many competing manufacturers, none of whom have significant market share or purchasing power.

Back in 2005, Apple execs knew that the world was moving toward mobile devices using flash RAM. So they killed off the hard drive based iPod mini and replaced it with the flash RAM based iPod nano. Everyone was surprised that Apple had EOL-ed their most popular iPod model. For one with far less storage.

Now Apple is the largest consumer of flash RAM in the world, and they have virtually cornered the flash RAM market. They get the best prices and most of their competitors are forced to out-bid each other for the remaining supply.

And that's just one component. Apple is going to continue to work on lowering their component costs. And their volume purchases will give them the leverage to do it. This is exactly the opposite of the Android situation with many competing manufacturers, none of whom have significant market share or purchasing power.

Good analysis, but I think Apple was as surprised as anybody that the price of flash memory hasn't come down on the same curve as every other electronic component in history. Now they're trying to make the best of a bad job by using their deep pockets to ensure their supply at a good price, at least relative to the also-rans.

I am very curious to see how the tablet market develops over the next year.

I know a lot of Android partisans are confident that Android based tablets will "take over" soon enough, "just like they did with phones." But the tablet market is different from the phone market in several key ways:

--Most tablets won't be sold with subsidies, so they'll have to compete at their actual retail price. Apple is clearly doing very well here.

--Therefore they won't have cell carriers as a point of distribution, and will have to compete for shelf space at consumer electronic retailers (most of whom do a very poor job of providing the customer of any sense of what the user experience might be like, putting non-functional or poorly maintained models up for display). Again, Apple has a huge advantage in being able to use their own retail stores to show off iPads to their best advantage, not to mention their relatively controlled presentation at Best Buy. Not to mention Target, Walmart, et al. Apple probably has the largest retail exposure of any CE company, at this point.

--More generally, the explosion of Android handsets is pretty easily explainable as a combination of steep subsidies, ubiquity, and the general growth of the smartphone market (which Apple of course created the demand for in the first place). I think it's a mistake to assume that, just because lots and lots of people have gone into the cell store to get a new phone on contract and been steered to an Android device, that there will be any similar mechanism in play for tablets. People aren't going to go to the cell store because they "need" a tablet (only to discover that 90% of what's available is running Android), they're going to go to Best Buy or Walmart or Target because they want a tablet. And in every one of those places there are going to be iPads, at as good or better prices, probably in better working order. And then beyond that all those Apple stores with iPads being shown in the best possible light.

We'll see, of course, but I think Android fans looking for a repeat of the phone ramp-up are going to be disappointed.

They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.

Apple sells to the general public, the android tablets sell to the techies. Depending on how much weight the mobile networks put behind shifting Android tablets worldwide, Android penetration in the tablet market is likely to be much slower than it was in smart phones.

Of course, the £100 cheap and nasty tablets will probably do quite well too although the user experience will leave much to be desired (People still actually buy archos products )

Beta was better... but it only had 60 minute tapes. They weren't long enough to record a movie.

They eventually got longer tapes... but by that time VHS had already won.

It's kinda like the Xoom... it's got great hardware... but it has no apps.

Thanks for the clarification. Now that you mentioned Xoom, I am not that convinced that it is really technically superior because it has this and that.

One can place a six-cylinder engine and all sorts of advanced gadgetry on a Hyundai, but it would be still a Hyundai and could not compare to a BMW or Mercedes Benz or even Toyota, at least for now.

I used Hyandai, as an example, because I read that it was technically much improved compared to its forebears in the 1980s, I believe when it was first introduced in the American market. Considering how much South Korean economy and technology have advanced, Americans and Western companies must not think that these Asian companies, technologies and products would remain inferior, forever.

That being said, to go back to the Xoom, it is telling that the Xoom was not able to deliver what Motorola considered be the differentiating factors of Xoom:

Flash software and the mantra, Apple iOS products are inherently inferior because allegedly most websites use Flash, and the iOS products could not. I debunked the fallacy of this argument from Adobe, and from Apple/Steve Jobs haters/detractors (so I would not go into it).

Even if it is true, since the Xoom, as sold, has no functioning flash, then it must not be able to view all those alleged 90% websites -- just like all iOS.

Motorola also was not able to deliver an operational 4G technology for existing Xoom already on sale. So, until it can actually activate the 4G, all existing Xoom buyers do not have anything technology superior to 3G.

High definition screen? What good is a superior screen resolution if you cannot view 90% of the alleged unviewable website without a Flash. It's like having an expensive telescope but you have no view of the sky because all you window views are blocked.

So, what else could it do better than Apple, in terms of website viewing? Superior applications, and games, and others perhaps? Oh wait, the Xoom does not have many Apps, so those poor Xoom buyers even have less to do that those poor iOS who supposedly could not view the alleged 90% websites that could not run properly without Flash. At least the iOS has a selection from supposedly mostly crappy 65K Apps.

So, what is left among the purported features of Xoom that makes it technically superior to iPad2,

Just to reiterate my point in the previous post, and rephrase it, current batches of iPad killers may be unable to compete now, and i doubt that anyone of them could beat the iPad, at least for the period 11 March 2011 to 11 March 2012. If anyone is bold enough to think otherwise, I placed a challenge to anyone who thinks this is not the case.

Having stated so, this current lopsided competition must not be viewed as though everyone else would fold, just like that and cede the market to Apple. We really don't know what will happen in the long run.

As a long time Apple products user, I hope Apple will stay very competitive, if not at the top, as it did with the iPod.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon T

I will eat my Mac if Apple do not sell more than 40m iPads this year.

The only thing stopping them will be a global crisis from oil ceasing to flow out of the Middle-East.

And there is an outside chance of that happening.

I have a gut instinct that the iPad will do very well last year, I even challenged TechStud on a bet, but he was just a windbag who wavers when money is placed on the table to back one's predictions. I am a pretty sure that no tablet is going to beat the sales of the iPad2 during the period 11 March 2011- 11 March 2012.

Bur, what I would not know, nor attempt to do, is make solid predictions. There are too many variables. The existing production line for the iPad has been strained. From what I read, they are banking on the new manufacturing plants in another city entirely to bolster the production. The bulk of sales of Apple products are being sold outside of the US. I doubt any of those analysts really have that much global research to understand purchasing patterns in other countries.

So, I won't say, below 40 million or higher. But, be a person of honor. Can you please show us a photo of you grounding your device and actually eating it, please, in case Apple does not sell above 40 million. *grins*

--More generally, the explosion of Android handsets is pretty easily explainable as a combination of steep subsidies, ubiquity, and the general growth of the smartphone market (which Apple of course created the demand for in the first place). I think it's a mistake to assume that, just because lots and lots of people have gone into the cell store to get a new phone on contract and been steered to an Android device, that there will be any similar mechanism in play for tablets. People aren't going to go to the cell store because they "need" a tablet (only to discover that 90% of what's available is running Android), they're going to go to Best Buy or Walmart or Target because they want a tablet. And in every one of those places there are going to be iPads, at as good or better prices, probably in better working order. And then beyond that all those Apple stores with iPads being shown in the best possible light.

also the tablets will be competing on the makers name and none of them really inspire, whereas Apple has a deep history of making desirable portable devices.

I can't see anybody in their right mind buying a tablet if it's not called an iPad. Even though tablets are cheaper than most laptops and desktops, it still is a lot of money to most people, especially in these economic Obama times. And contrary to statements made by trolls, various fanboys and liars on the internet, people eventually vote with their wallets, and that's why the iPad is killing everybody else, and that's why it will continue to kill everybody else.

I think that very few people are willing to take a huge gamble on other tablets, most of which probably won't even be around 12 months from now. Every other tablet released so far has practically been DOA. Other companies can pack in as much useless specs as they want into their tablets, it doesn't matter and the average person doesn't care. When it comes time to spend their hard earned money, people want the original and that's what they're going to buy. Few people are willing to take a huge gamble on something else, because that's exactly what they'd be doing, taking a huge gamble. They'd be better off going to Vegas with their money, as the odds are probably way better.

When Apple first released the original iPad for $499, they just owned everybody and to quote Steve Jobs, their competitors were "flummoxed", and they still are. I also think that it's hilarious that Apple which has been known for having high quality, higher priced products now has a killer product that is cheaper than anybody else's product on the market.

As for me, I'll be doing my part in contributing to burst the bubble, because I'll be picking up my new iPad soon enough. And millions and millions of other people will be doing the exact same thing.

Beta was better... but it only had 60 minute tapes. They weren't long enough to record a movie.

They eventually got longer tapes... but by that time VHS had already won.

It's kinda like the Xoom... it's got great hardware... but it has no apps.

Not sure why people keep banging on about the Xoom's great hardware.

The screen is worse (poor viewing angles, colour and pixel grid); it's thicker and heavier (despite being more plasticky). Tegra 2 is comparable to the A5 and PowerVR chip; and its battery life in standy is about half that of the iPad 2.

So, what's it got that the iPad doesn't?

An MicroSD slot that doesn't yet work -- makes up for not having a 64GB model, I suppose.

A barometer. WTF? Is this for all the tablet toting amateur meteorologists out there? Mainstream use case... /sarcasm.

Double the RAM. Probably/possibly. But then Android seems to need to use it with it's less optimised multi-tasking approach.

Slightly better cameras that strike me as a bit pointless on a tablet. Who needs anything better than a back camera that can support augmented reality apps, and in certain video calling situations?

Oh, and the promise of a future upgrade to LTE at some point. Great. That's relevant to about 1% (disclaimer: stat totally pulled from my arse) of potential consumers. Not to mention what it might do to battery life (Exhibit A: EVO 4G, Exhibit B: HTC Thunderbolt).

Personally, I'll go for the slimmer, more useful, and higher quality kit every time. Pointless specs are just, well, pointless.

Using discounted build plan estimates to project tablet shipments for the year, the analyst claims that tablet makers will build approximately 65.1 million tablets in 2011. When compared against J.P. Morgan's estimates of 47.9 million tablets sold this year, companies could find themselves with as much as 51 percent oversupply in a worst case scenario.

That is 51% for all manufacturers taken together. That might well be a few % for Apple and 80-90% for some other players. That sentence should have read "some companies could find themselves with a huge (far more than 50%) oversupply in a worst case scenario".

I can't see anybody in their right mind buying a tablet if it's not called an iPad. Even though tablets are cheaper than most laptops and desktops, it still is a lot of money to most people, especially in these economic Obama times. And contrary to statements made by trolls, various fanboys and liars on the internet, people eventually vote with their wallets, and that's why the iPad is killing everybody else, and that's why it will continue to kill everybody else.

I think that very few people are willing to take a huge gamble on other tablets, most of which probably won't even be around 12 months from now. Every other tablet released so far has practically been DOA. Other companies can pack in as much useless specs as they want into their tablets, it doesn't matter and the average person doesn't care. When it comes time to spend their hard earned money, people want the original and that's what they're going to buy. Few people are willing to take a huge gamble on something else, because that's exactly what they'd be doing, taking a huge gamble. They'd be better off going to Vegas with their money, as the odds are probably way better.

When Apple first released the original iPad for $499, they just owned everybody and to quote Steve Jobs, their competitors were "flummoxed", and they still are. I also think that it's hilarious that Apple which has been known for having high quality, higher priced products now has a killer product that is cheaper than anybody else's product on the market.

As for me, I'll be doing my part in contributing to burst the bubble, because I'll be picking up my new iPad soon enough. And millions and millions of other people will be doing the exact same thing.

I try to avoid using terms like anyone, everybody, anybody. etc. that include or exlude the entire population of consumers.

Not everyone will buy and iPad, and it is unikely that "nobody will buy the Xoom, or other tablets".

I would not judge someone who sincerely believes on the merits of one product, over my own choices. For example, if someone buys into the Android system because they thought it was an "Open" system, we should accept their chices. I do not know where I first heard of the statement:

I like that Apple is being aggressive too, on price aside from doing as much in other areas, including technical side. Without much subsidy from telecommunications companies, it is possible that the iPod2 scenario might happen.

I am not sure exactly which is superior, the VHS or Beta recorder during the tape era??? Anyway, this is used as an example where supposedly the technically superior technology (VHS) was beaten by the Beta recorder untl the latter became univeral. I think the same upheaval is taking place in the competing "high definition" television technologies.

Unlike in the early 1970-1990s, there are more companies now worldwide with great technical resouces with sufficient financial resources to be able to take a few beatings, but live on to continue the fight.

There was a time when Japanese products were considered inferior (ca 1950s-1960s), but because of the interlocking of the financial-research and marketing system in Japan (through the Zaibatsus, they eventuallly eclipsed not only many of their American competitors but also their European competitors.

What my Japanese professor was explaining to me was that at some time in the past, there is "One Japan" - not only involving the government and the Zaibatzus but one that was tacitly supported by the Japanese nation. Part of this was the Japanese pride of a people with a long history, but utterly humiliated by their defeat in the Pacific War in the 1940s.

Then, I believe it was in the 1970s or thereabouts when products from Taiwan were considered technically inferior from Western and Japanese goods. Taiwanese are the same ethnic groups that were deposed during the Chiang Kai Tsec (spelling???) and Mao Tse Tung power struggle. Many fled to either Taiwan or Hongkong, some migrated to the Western Pacific rim. But, culturally they consider themselves "One People" too -- Chinese with very long shared history.

If you study the industrialization of Taiwan, and Mainland China, you will find that the practical Chinese power makers set aside politics and used the vast resources of mainland China to forward their goals, economically.

These cooperation and collaboration among Chinese, as "One People" is the reason why mainland China today is the second largest economic empire in the world. I do not think we would be alive to see it, but at the pace things are going in the United States (political gridlock coupled with extreme polarization). there is no "One America", I won't be surprised if China would displace the US as the number one economic power in the world within the second half of this century, if not sooner.

Don't discount the Koreans too.

The point here is that the competitors of Apple from these countries may not be doing as well now, but unlike Western companies, many Asian companies have the backing of their national industrialists and financial moguls, but also their people.

Let's not forget for example, that Apple is very dependent on Asian (China, Taiwan, Japan and Korea) techno-industrial empire. All it would take is a Chinese who has the vision akin to Steve Jobs, or some other builders of current multi-nationals. Unlike their parents, many Chinese of the elite classs have been educated or lived and traveled extensively in the Western countries. Even Steve Jobs have been influence by Asian culture in terms of his easthetics.

CGC

It was Sony's Beta that was FAR better than VHS. That's why people had their money on HD-DVD this past time around. I think Sony won this recent one because they included a Blu-ray player in every new game console that was updated frequently.

I try to avoid using terms like anyone, everybody, anybody. etc. that include or exlude the entire population of consumers.

When I write anyone, everybody, anybody etc., I obviously do not mean 100% of all people. I am referring to the majority. I'm a fan of hyperbole. And I don't believe that I wrote that "everybody" will buy an iPad or that "nobody" will buy a Xoom.

I'm sure that there are even a few unfortunate souls who purchased the JoJo tablet when it came out.

I'm sure we have all heard the saying "They are laughing their ass off, all the way to the bank!

Skip

Bottom line is that the competition had years to get the tablet market going and got absolutely nowhere. Instead competitors were giving us awful netbooks that appealed solely because they were so inexpensive.

If Apple has an advantage in this market it comes by it honestly. It's simple, really. Apple has put iPads into people's hands that are useful in many ways right out of the box. From Day 1 iPad owners had all sorts of functions they could perform with the device and it was easy for many to figure the thing out because it was using an interface language that had grown familiar via the iPod line. Also, realizing that previous tablet attempts had failed, Apple was smart enough to bring their device in at a compelling price point because had the iPad not sold exceptionally well, it might well have meant the end to attempts at launching the tablet form factor.

Beta was better... but it only had 60 minute tapes. They weren't long enough to record a movie.

They eventually got longer tapes... but by that time VHS had already won.

It's kinda like the Xoom... it's got great hardware... but it has no apps.

While true, that the tapes were shorter, that was not the main reason that Beta lost the consumer war. The main reason was that Sony was short-sighted and refused to license their technology. JVC, on the other hand, licensed their VHS technology to anyone and everyone (even Sony, eventually). The price/feature competition amongst the VHS brands made it increasingly difficult for Sony to compete. Those who knew the difference still bought Betamax, but that market was too small to support continued production. And Betacam, a superior version of Betamax (with tapes running faster - only 30 minute cassettes) was the broadcast standard for many years.

If people beat Apple at all it's on price. That is how the Android phones sneaked in, on lower priced handsets. But that won't happen with the iPad, for a while at least, since Apple are being very aggressive on price.

I wouldn't exactly use the term: "very aggressive". I would say 'aggressive'. If the iPad 2 came in at $399 for the 16GB Wi-Fi version, that would be "very aggressive".

Everyone, including myself, was caught off guard with how successful iPad 1 would be. Even with all the hype I think people are still under estimating how successful the iPad 2 will be. Apple might just own the entire portable computer market by the time iPad 3 rolls around. And this is coming from a Windows guy...

I am very curious to see how the tablet market develops over the next year.

I know a lot of Android partisans are confident that Android based tablets will "take over" soon enough, "just like they did with phones." But the tablet market is different from the phone market in several key ways:

--Most tablets won't be sold with subsidies, so they'll have to compete at their actual retail price. Apple is clearly doing very well here.

--Therefore they won't have cell carriers as a point of distribution, and will have to compete for shelf space at consumer electronic retailers (most of whom do a very poor job of providing the customer of any sense of what the user experience might be like, putting non-functional or poorly maintained models up for display). Again, Apple has a huge advantage in being able to use their own retail stores to show off iPads to their best advantage, not to mention their relatively controlled presentation at Best Buy. Not to mention Target, Walmart, et al. Apple probably has the largest retail exposure of any CE company, at this point.

--More generally, the explosion of Android handsets is pretty easily explainable as a combination of steep subsidies, ubiquity, and the general growth of the smartphone market (which Apple of course created the demand for in the first place). I think it's a mistake to assume that, just because lots and lots of people have gone into the cell store to get a new phone on contract and been steered to an Android device, that there will be any similar mechanism in play for tablets. People aren't going to go to the cell store because they "need" a tablet (only to discover that 90% of what's available is running Android), they're going to go to Best Buy or Walmart or Target because they want a tablet. And in every one of those places there are going to be iPads, at as good or better prices, probably in better working order. And then beyond that all those Apple stores with iPads being shown in the best possible light.

We'll see, of course, but I think Android fans looking for a repeat of the phone ramp-up are going to be disappointed.

Good points all around. Meanwhile the Android fans (... is it just my experience or has anyone else noticed they seem all be the same people who were the anti-Apple pro Microsoft nerds in their former lives?) have a mantra "Walled Garden" it seems to be all they can say, over and over and over ....

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

It should not be about volumes although the press love that. It should be about profits or lack thereof from any given market. Using those metrics Apple already own the touch phone and touch tablet market by a long way.

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"